Systemic Development > Speakers
Specs versus experience
Outcast:
--- Quote from: "OnTrack" ---
I take issue with the fact that some mastering engineers use the B&W speakers as the "holy grail" and well, look at the state of many modern productions. Only if you have the B&W's are you to be "close" but they are far from level as it compares to the last 40 years of high fidelity productions. they (engineers and speaker systems) are manipulating the art in a direction away from established balances.
--- End quote ---
I have listened to the B&W 805s (fatiguing treble) and 802D (very nice treble but vocal and piano were not natural). I was dissappointed.
Carlman:
Hey, I'll be the first to bash anything recent from B&W... but I thought most studios used special studio speakers... which no one uses in hi-fi. I had the EXACT same reaction as you to the Watt-Puppy's... I think that's just their character.... it sounded like that on everything. However, there was a guy that LOVED them sitting right next to me at a huge hi-fi shop in NJ. I was speechless.... I don't know if he bought them but I left so I didn't have to see that train wreck. ;)
I get the feeling that many 'masters' at production houses put little more thought into the process other than whether they've put all the ducks in rows or not by some formula. The best analogy I can think of is Human Resources puts a check next to every skill you have.... and if those checks = job 123, you are qualified for job 123. To take it a step further, I would wager there are execs at the top saying, make this one REALLY LOUD! IT'S GOING TO THE YOUNGER DEMOGRAPHIC... or there's someone pulling the strings that doesn't know crap about music quality but has industry wisdom to make money, the heart of the music 'business'... not the music 'art' that we appreciate.
We live in the gray as audiophiles, constantly analyzing and questioning our choices to reach the pinnacle of enjoyment... Many of us find the journey as fun as the destination.
I like finding the nuggets of art in the music world that someone decided to craft carefully. Having a great hifi helps me appreciate it even more... and that's where I get a lot of enjoyment.
-C
Double Ugly:
--- Quote from: "miklorsmith" ---Can measurements define the space created by a system? How about the 2nd and 3rd harmonics that give body and life to an instrument? Do they measure soundstaging/imaging properties? (the latter are "false" qualities, IMO, the province of systems/listeners who have not discovered the first two)
I've heard systems with measured "flat" response that sounded dead. I'd speculate one way to achieve flatness is to pad everything down to the lowest denominator. Of course, this makes for boring listening but measures great!
--- End quote ---
In part, I think you've just described what I believe makes my system so satisfying to my wife and I.
My approach to achieving satisfaction in my system begins and ends w/ the speakers. IMO, if I'm to learn anything about what I'm hearing from the rest of my equipment, the speakers must be as absolutely neutral and measure as flat as possible. IOW, they must be truest form of transducer, uncolored to the extreme.
I believe I have about as uncolored a speaker as I've ever heard in the SP Technology Timepieces... at least at anything approaching their price point. But since they are so uncolored, and since they are so revealing, they will produce the most heinous sound imaginable if paired w/ the wrong equipment. Similar results are wrought even if paired w/ the right equipment if listening to poorly mixed/mastered/recorded material.
And here's where your points come into play...
My Butler Monad monoblocks were designed so that very pure 2nd order harmonics are intentionally produced. Sure, other distortion is present as well - due in part to the use of the BK Butler-spec'd 300B on the output stage - but I believe the 2nd order harmonics do most of the important stuff. The auditory result of the Monads + Timepieces (or any of the SP Tech line, actually) is dumbfounding... and I mean that in the best possible way. :wink:
I can hear so deeply into the music, be made aware of every detail of everything recorded, and have it presented to me in a way that is so musical, so real, so satisfyingly organic that I can't wait to hear the next movement, song, or CD.
That said, nothing is w/o trade-offs, and my system is no different. If the recording is average or worse, my ears pay the price. That really sucks when the song or CD is something I really like to listen to in the car or on the radio, but such is life. I'd rather have the ability to get lost in the depth and breadth of a good or better recording than have everything sound just OK. Given how good some of my favorite material sounds, it's a trade-off I'm more than willing to make.
-Jim
miklorsmith:
Well said! I'd love to hear the Monads sometime. I have a funny feeling they will be reknowned classics, as they are spoken of in hushed tones - a REAL tube amp, but with massive muscle.
And, I've heard nothing but good about the Timepieces with the caviat that proper amplification is an absolute must.
Hmmm . . .
Nice work.
WEEZ:
Hi Jim,
I agree with all you said...except.. :lol: ......
...bad recordings are gonna sound bad no matter what.
WEEZ
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version